If capitalism won't guarantee everyone a great standard of living, does socialism have a better track record?

Question

This is a follow up from my prior question...it seems that some people feel that capitalism is to blame for their low income and poverty. I've noticed that, for people with ambition, capitalism offers the opportunity for wealth. What does socialism offer?

Answer 1

Capitalism has eliminated absolute poverty.  People on welfare have a higher caloric intake than a WWII soldier.  Have you seen the size of some of these people?

Socialism, unless it is voluntary such as worker cooperatives, will eventually lead to poverty.  

Answer 2

Capitalism is dying. Socialism is very good for ordinary people.

Answer 3

Capitalism offers the opportunity for wealth for those in a strong market position. For the rest of us, it offers wage slavery.

Answer 4

You either are socialist or capitalist -- you cannot be both. Socialism is known to bring stablity and peace, but not necessairly a high standard of living because forcing people to redistribute wealth corrupts American business and makes it uncompetitive in the world. However, some forms of "socialism" may be quite useful such as equal public education opportunities, which can counteract  low income and poverty, but that's if it's done properly and adequately. If government decided to spend more wealth on education, we would have much more equality for all. However, in the United States, we spend too much money on education but it yields inadequate results. However, the issue isn't really how much money, but rather is it being spent on the right things. My point here is that creating equality IS THE KEY TO a higher standard of living because one must understand that productivity is the key to a higher standard of living

Answer 5

Socialism will not even guarantee that you will be allowed to live! What is it that you want for someone to take care of you from cradle to grave? We have enough of your kind on our wellfare rolls. If that is what you want go to china or Russia and live. That is if you can handle it!

Answer 6

Socialism is defined as state control of goods and services.  Pure socialist societies have tried and failed at succeeding.  Capitalism is the best bet if you are looking for success, obviously.  However, there are some countries, such as China and Russia, which have combined the two ideologies and they have seen a great turn upwards in their economies.  

Answer 7

Capitalism itself isn't the reason for looming poverty and low quality of life.  Capitalism mixed with runaway globalization, free trade, exponential advancements in technology, and overpopulation are the reasons.  Capitalism is just the vehicle we use to get to the bad place.  Socialism would likely be no better.

Answer 8

One of the plusses for socialism is that the government has a vested interest in keeping people healthy.  In a capitalistic society where the medical corporations can charge what ever they want and drive people into bankruptcy without government aid, the capitalist leaders have absolutely NO vested interest in keeping the people healthy.  Quite the opposite, as long as the corporations are getting richer and richer and the politicians are getting paid off by the corporations, the people's health suffers.

In socialism, because the government foots the bill for all medical costs, the government is extremely interested in preventive medicine, good diets, few junk food restaurants, cigarettes, alcohol and other unhealthy habits for its people.  Advertising for such "poisens" are almost non existant where in a capitalistic society, the people can be tricked, fooled and unprotected (except militarily) to any degree.  

I think people are seriously abused in a capitalistic regeme and the corporations and politicians make out like highway robbers.

I think the only salvation for America is to see a socialist party rise in power.  As it is the government doesn't take care of the people at all and doesn't feel any obligation to care for the people.  Making money has priority over quality of life today in the U.S.A.  Any kind of propoganda is allowed as long as it produces money for someone.  Lies are abundant in advertising.

If people think socialism only exists in Communist countries like Russia and China, think again.  Countries like Sweden, Denmark and Norway have a great economy, have stayed out of military problems, have great education, great medical care, low crime rate and low unemployment without forcing people to conform.  What I can't understand is why the U.S. is so stubborn and refuses to do what works.  

As long as corporations profit from building prisons, we have no incentive to quit producing criminals to fill them.  As long as there is no corporation profiting from education, there won't be enough emphisis on producing good, quality education for our children.  Instead we are funneling them into prison as fast as we can as there is more money to be made there.  I'm disgusted!!!

Obama isn't going to created any substantual change.  What will create more change is a good Socialist Party entering the arena.  I'm sick of democan/republicrats...same ole, same ole.

Answer 9

Good question.

Life itself is no guarantee of anything - and a government that thinks it can solve this dilemma is a fool's government.

To paraphrase Lincoln - we must be aware that a government that is powerful enough to give everyone everything is also powerful enough to take it all away.

Answer 10

sure. if you want negative productivity

hugs!

Answer 11

Socialism has only guaranteed equal mediocrity at best and often equal poverty except for a small governing class. There is no evidence that socialism cures social ills or allows all to prosper- it just doesnt happen.

Answer 12

50 years ago your question was more relevant, but no longer. Most western countries have evolved to understand that a mixed economy with a high minimum wage works best. In Europe and Australia, the minimum wages are double that of the USA. Require capitalism to pay well and the welfare or socialist state isn't needed. Socialism only offers a mediocre quality of life for all, and makes it difficult or even illegal to be exceedingly successful, depending upon the degree of socialism.

Answer 13

Socialism offers misery for everyone, except under achievers and government employees.  

Answer 14

Capitalism's attractive if you're already rich. Most people in the world will never get the chance to live like we do in the West. For them, socialism offers the opportunity to not starve to death.